Bonsai Tree
Turning a new leaf
- Feb 2, 2014
- 9,246
- 4,585
Not going to happen. We would need a player entering his prime in a trade involving Domi, not a player on his last 1 or 2 productive seasons.
Speculation: 2018 Off-season Thread
- Thread starter SniperHF
- Start date
- Status
Exactly, except here on forum 40 where most want to trade our youth for established players leaving their prime in a year or two.
BUX7PHX
Registered User
- Jul 7, 2011
- 5,581
- 1,350
Exactly, except here on forum 40 where most want to trade our youth for established players leaving their prime in a year or two.
Yeah, it worked horribly once we got rid of that young guy Duclair and picked up that established player Panik.
What was our record after that trade? 21-14-6 or something?Yes, the start of the season featured a pickup of Stepan and Raanta and did not feature a 7th OA pick in a weak draft as a prospect. After the way we closed out the season, that trade is looking better and better and will continue to look better and better in the future. But if holding on to Deangelo and Mittlestadt is a better option, then I can't do much to change your mind. Trading away youth for a vet will hurt when we only have 2 or 3 young players in the pipeline, but since we have 7 or 8, that may actually be an okay thing for any option. Certainly what Panik was relative to Duclair over the last half of the year actually appeared to make us a better team both on and off the ice, so not everything is doom and gloom if a solid professional at a good time in their career comes to AZ in exchange for a prospect.
Yeah, it worked horribly once we got rid of that young guy Duclair and picked up that established player Panik.
Yes, the start of the season featured a pickup of Stepan and Raanta and did not feature a 7th OA pick in a weak draft as a prospect. After the way we closed out the season, that trade is looking better and better and will continue to look better and better in the future. But if holding on to Deangelo and Mittlestadt is a better option, then I can't do much to change your mind. Trading away youth for a vet will hurt when we only have 2 or 3 young players in the pipeline, but since we have 7 or 8, that may actually be an okay thing for any option. Certainly what Panik was relative to Duclair over the last half of the year actually appeared to make us a better team both on and off the ice, so not everything is doom and gloom if a solid professional at a good time in their career comes to AZ in exchange for a prospect.
The weak draft part was a massive part of the calculation, which you acknowledged but I think are still downplaying how much a factor it was. I considered 7OA on the table to be traded as soon as we lost the lottery.
We may have 7 or 8 in the pipeline but I'd argue none (at most 1) at the quality of what will be available at #5.
As for Panik, while he did eventually start playing, he did not come around until after the upswing had already begun. The Coyotes went 5-0-1 at the start of the turnaround in February; Panik was playing 12 minutes a game and was scratched for 2 of them. I don't think that trade had all that much to do with the turnaround. He was a lucky recipient of Stepan removing his head from his rear end and Keller waking back up. That he put in the work consistently in March/April is praiseworthy but he played a comparatively small role.
BUX7PHX
Registered User
- Jul 7, 2011
- 5,581
- 1,350
Agreed on the 7th OA pick from last year. We could also state that the #7 was more likely to move b/c we had another pick in the top 25 to hold on to, but that's for another time.
So the upswing had already begun with far more sightings in the press box for Duclair and him stating his intentions of wanting to be moved. Panik comes in and puts up 19 points in 35 games vs Duclair's 15 in 33. But more importantly, the team actually appeared to get better with each game, which may not have been the case before.
I am probably being way too subjective on the capabilities and deficiencies of Duclair v Panik, but the point is that we may have dodged a bullet by keeping a guy, who for whatever reason, didn't mesh well. RT mentioned weeding out the guys who didn't know how to practice. Sounds like that was what made Duclair hit the skids. In this particular instance, it is very possible that Duclair has a more productive career than Panik, however that may play itself out. Maybe Panik gets injured at age 32 and never plays again, whereas Duclair takes 4 more years before it all comes together for him, and then has 6-7 more productive years to his name. It is still possible to benefit by having a productive player in the rotation like Panik now, vs. waiting and getting some extreme ups and downs in accountability, practice habits, and other such things that definitely attributed to impatience on Duclair's part in wanting out.
This draft is a pretty talented draft, so I highly doubt we move the pick. However, if there were some trades out there, I think that the opportunity to move the #5 pick for a true top line RW now is a good value. Not Kessel, but one of those players in the 20-27 age range, if available. We may have to dig into the prospect pool to facilitate, but as I probably didn't do a good enough job of pointing out, trading a prospect or young player on the rise (which we can all agree Duclair falls into that category) never actually hurt us and it is very possible that we outright benefited from that. A trade of the magnitude I am talking about would not compare to the details of the Panik/Duclair deal, but I still think that is it not out of the realm of possibility that if the right deal is consummated, we don't necessarily wind up losing out short term or long term.
I don't think we lost the Duclair/Panik trade short or long term, but the basis of the argument being used by jakey is that you don't trade prospects for those types of players. There exists a small sample which shows that we aren't half bad off on that trade right now from an individual and team standpoint. If that exists here, then maybe there are other ways that can also exist involving the #5 pick.
Seven or eight in the pipeline? Hell, after Strome and Crouse we might not have another forward worthy of the NHL. Strome and Crouse are not a sure bet at this time as it is either. The way it looks to me, our forward pipe line is pretty damn bare. I wouldn't get too cocky regarding the Stepan/Mittlestadt trade. Get back to me in 5 yrs. on that one. I believe we have enough vets and leadership on this team but I expect Chayka to make a trade because of our need at certain areas, I just hope Chayka doesn't trade one of the core kids for a ROR, Kessler or a Johnson type player. I would just as soon pick up a UFA on a short term deal, even if I have to overpay, instead of losing a couple of these kids that we have waited five years for. I want to keep on picking up assets and let the young one mature together and continue this rebuild.Yeah, it worked horribly once we got rid of that young guy Duclair and picked up that established player Panik.
Yes, the start of the season featured a pickup of Stepan and Raanta and did not feature a 7th OA pick in a weak draft as a prospect. After the way we closed out the season, that trade is looking better and better and will continue to look better and better in the future. But if holding on to Deangelo and Mittlestadt is a better option, then I can't do much to change your mind. Trading away youth for a vet will hurt when we only have 2 or 3 young players in the pipeline, but since we have 7 or 8, that may actually be an okay thing for any option. Certainly what Panik was relative to Duclair over the last half of the year actually appeared to make us a better team both on and off the ice, so not everything is doom and gloom if a solid professional at a good time in their career comes to AZ in exchange for a prospect.
And everyone except ROR are at the tail end of their prime. IF we were contending for a SC and one of these guy could possibly get us over the top, I would say trade a couple of picks and prospects, but we are probably three four years from that position. Where will these players be at that time? Lots of options? Maybe, but at what cost?
Thoughts on trading for just Hagelin if we end up moving a LW for a C/RW? Let's say something around Perlini and Johnson.
Gotta imagine the price on Hagelin is cheap given he's a little overpaid - 1 yr left at 4 mil. But how cheap? I imagine they'd rather use that money on their D, then replace Hagelin with an AHL forward who is ready for the NHL.
I like Hagelin though. Solid vet, and he still has wheels. Had a slow year offensively but found his game in the second half. Plus you can just drop him into Tocchet's system. There's no learning curve.
Also allows us to use 5 OV on a player who needs more time (ie, not Tkachuk). We could take Hughes or Wahlstrom, etc. instead.
Panik - Stepan - Keller
Domi - Strome - Johnson
Hagelin - Dvorak - Fischer
Crouse - Kruger - Cousins
Gotta imagine the price on Hagelin is cheap given he's a little overpaid - 1 yr left at 4 mil. But how cheap? I imagine they'd rather use that money on their D, then replace Hagelin with an AHL forward who is ready for the NHL.
I like Hagelin though. Solid vet, and he still has wheels. Had a slow year offensively but found his game in the second half. Plus you can just drop him into Tocchet's system. There's no learning curve.
Also allows us to use 5 OV on a player who needs more time (ie, not Tkachuk). We could take Hughes or Wahlstrom, etc. instead.
Panik - Stepan - Keller
Domi - Strome - Johnson
Hagelin - Dvorak - Fischer
Crouse - Kruger - Cousins
RemoAZ
Let it burn
Any of your guy's line combos that keep Panik on the 1st line look horrible to me. We have to be able to upgrade that spot, especially if Keller stays at RW. Give me Domi or Perlini all day over Panik.
TheLegend
Megathread Gadfly
It oh... IKEA pulls plans for Glendale. Just made signing Swedes more difficult.
BUX7PHX
Registered User
- Jul 7, 2011
- 5,581
- 1,350
The 7 or 8 I am referring to are the players who are on the NHL roster right now. The pipeline isn't bare at all. It looks bare because those players are in the unique position of being good enough for the NHL and not be over 22-23 years old. There are a ton of players at that age who are just getting their first call-up.
Do we not have 7 or 8 players that are capable of being in the NHL whom we still have a significant amount of cost control over, given that we have their RFA rights? Each one of those players should be available to us for 6 or more years, should we decide to keep them. That is the pipeline that I am referring to who are ready to take the next step in the NHL.
I truly think we are saying the same thing, in a sense. Of those 7-8 players (Domi, Strome, Crouse, Perlini, Dvorak, Keller, and Fischer. Throw Bunting's potential and maybe Merkley, if he can get over injuries), if we were to order them in terms of value now and value for the future, I have no problem trying to work a deal to get rid of the 7th or 6th best prospect. I don't think we get a top line RW with that, so you weigh the benefit of getting a player now vs someone who may still be developing and may never develop to the value of the player we are gaining. It's a risk - all trades will be. But we have the talent and depth to start to be able to take that type of risk. It started a little bit with the trades last year during the draft, and maybe there is another type of deal out there to solidify the roster which may involve getting rid of a top prospect or pick that is a little more questionable to succeed. I know that is a horrible way of saying that, but half of the value in deals and picks isn't necessarily in picking the guy who makes it, but avoiding the players who digress or struggle to maximize their potential.
Last edited:
rt
The Kinder, Gentler Version
Exactly. A few years back when the kids were not ready, most wanted to trade the vets for more kids, and now when the kids are starting to play in the NHL, maturing, gaining experience and getting better before our very eyes, some want to trade them for vets. What the hell I'm I missing?
Correct. Panik has no business on the 1st line, but we have no choice right now because of his chemistry with his line mates. I imagine his play will have him demoted rather early in the year, but he is a solid 2nd line winger.
I consider NHL players not in the pipeline, rather players playing junior and AHL etc. Kids mature at different rates. We were high on Strome, then we weren't, now there is more hope again, Same held true for Perlini and Domi. Most have never been high on Crouse, yet he could come in a be a solid player. In the cap era, you build a team thru the draft and let them develop. We can't start trading young good cheap talent for expensive vets now or we will be running into cap problems before we become successful. DVO could very easily be our ROR. Domi our Johnson. Crouse our Wilson. I don't want to give up on our core young kids yet. Let's see how they mature and then go from there. Chayka has stayed the course on this rebuild, I just hope AB doesn't panic and tell Chayka to trade for a high priced vet with a year or two left in their prime. I do believe Chayka will make a trade for a RW.
Maloney had a full-on patient asset collection approach. He was open to harvesting vets for picks. Chayka has pushed the fast forward button - selectively trading hope for experience. I think the change in fan opinions that you noted is driven by the strategy of the GM.
I'm not suggesting that Chayka is lacking patience or that one strategy is better than the other. It's probably ownership setting the general direction anyways.
Chayka has been very patient with our core kids, so far. I just hope he continues to be patient.
rt
The Kinder, Gentler Version
Westerlund and Dahlin are best buddies. Wonder if we could get something good out of Buffalo for Westerlund. They’re suddenly very center rich, with Eichel, ROR, Mittelstadt, etc. Maybe they’d be willing to part with Rasmus Asplund or Cliff Pu for Westerlund?
I’d at least want to send back a contract for the purposes of the 50-contract limit. Some no hope AHLer.
We could then flip the pick, maybe in a deal for someone like Kessel. Fair to say his trade price tag is the same now as it was when he was moved three years ago? Yes, he’s had his best seasons since then but he’s also three years older. The same limitations exist too — his no trade list, high cap hit — making his potential list of suitors fairly short. I believe Pittsburgh was the only one last time around that had the cap space and that was deemed an acceptable location by Kessel.
This was the deal:
“Toronto Maple Leafs traded Phil Kessel, Tim Erixon, Tyler Biggs and a 2nd round selection in 2016 to the Pittsburgh Penguins for Nick Spaling, Kasperi Kapanen, Scott Harrington, a 1st and a 3rd round selections in 2016.”
So Kessel, two AHL guys, and a 2nd for a vet wing, a solid prospect who was sliding at the time, a failing D prospect, a low first, and a third.
So what’s our comparable, for just Kessel (minus the AHLers and the second)?
Panik (Spaling)
Merkley (Kapanen)
Wood (Harrington)
1st (from Hossa)
3rd
That doesn’t seem like enough, but maybe as it’s likely to be a limited market given the restrictions of Kessel’s contract.
The other thing with that deal is it clears a ton of cap space for the Pens. We can even retain on Panik or send a cheaper player to further their cap savings. How many other teams can take a near 7 mil cap hit and not even blink?
The Pens could then take those savings and help their D. Basically reinvest Kessel’s money in a free agent like Carlson.
The Pens could then take those savings and help their D. Basically reinvest Kessel’s money in a free agent like Carlson.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
2024 NHL Draft Lottery Team that wins #1 pick - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 9Staked: $11,200.00Event closes- Updated: